3 more reader updates

Here are three more updates from readers whose questions were answered here last year.

1. My boss is breaking laws and promises but I feel guilty about leaving (#1 at the link)

I asked you a question about my unethical employer back in November, and though it’s taken me almost three months to quit, I finally had enough and walked out yesterday. I was browsing a sex offender listing during my lunch break, not expecting to find anything of interest, until my boss’s name showed up with the exact crime he was charged with (child molestation in the 1st degree). My state also lists the “danger level” of each offender, and his listing indicated that he is highly dangerous and likely to re-offend. I understand that individuals can be falsely accused of sex crimes (and my situation reminds me of this post), but I could not knowingly work for him anymore, especially since I have a part-time job working with children on the weekends.

While I did gain some work experience (and I have no idea if I should list this job on a resume), I’m glad I left. The advice for my previous question was sound, and I appreciate the feedback from the readers.

2. My coworkers won’t stop asking why I’m walking with a cane

I’m the OP of the question back in July regarding cane use. Sadly, the cane has stayed with me and seems that it will be for the foreseeable future. My coworkers’ questions have mostly died down as the cane has become a normal part of my routine, and based on a few answers from people with chronic use of ability aids, I’ve made a point of always keeping the cane with me, rather than having it be something that comes and goes and might occasion more comment in the future. It’s easier for it to just be a permanent fixture. And helpful, because I can never be totally sure when a good foot day will stop being good. On the up side, I have gotten much less self-conscious about needing the cane.

Anyway, my new question is whether a particular situation would fall under reasonable accommodation, and how I should handle it.

A few people in my department have printers at their desks, while the rest of us have to walk across our section of the building to access a communal printer, probably about 15-20 yards away. A coworker I’m friendly with will be leaving our department soon, and she and I both presented a request to the boss that her printer be transferred to me so that I won’t have to make the walk. While I’m physically able to do so, it’s uncomfortable and would be easier on me to avoid the need to make the walk multiple times a day, stand and wait if someone else’s documents are printing, etc. However, our boss stated that he hadn’t made a firm decision, and would most likely hold a raffle or drawing to see who in our department would receive the printer.

My understanding of the ADA is that I don’t need to have documentation from a doctor if my disability is easily visible, and making sure I’m the one to get a printer that will otherwise be dispersed to someone in the department at random certainly shouldn’t be an unreasonable accommodation. Is this an angle I should press with my boss?

Really, a raffle? When there’s someone with a disability who could benefit from it? Wow.

Have you explicitly told your boss that the reason you want the printer is because walking is difficult for you? If you haven’t, that should be your next step — as in, “I appreciate that a lot of people would like to have a printer closer to them. In my case, I’m asking because it would be significantly easier on me physically. Is that an accommodation we could make?”

If he doesn’t agree, you might have better luck having a pleasant chat with your HR department, who are going to be familiar with the ADA even if your boss isn’t.

3. How soon is too soon to travel for work when you’re new on the job?

I am the OP from last November who wasn’t sure when travel ought to start for a new employee. At your call for updates in early December, I said things were going well!

Unfortunately the situation at my tiny office has declined. My boss chose to give us the run-around with regards to the holidays and did not give us our stat holiday pay unless we worked the days before and after Christmas and Boxing Day, claiming that the vacation time we had asked for was “not approved” and therefore the days off were unscheduled absences.

This week he asked our lone technician on Monday to go on a two-day business trip Wednesday and Thursday, involving a significant drive and overnight stay. Our technician said he could not do an unexpected overnight on short notice, as he didn’t have anyone to look after his kids. Our boss then proceeded to yell at him (actual raised-voices, profanity-laden yelling) saying “Your kids have a mother, you can’t keep using them as an excuse not to travel!” when our technician does not–in fact, in the past two months he has spent significant time in Calgary, Fort MacMurray, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland, and several places in Ontario. Furthermore, his ex-wife has been in hospital with the flu, and was truly unable to look after the kids at that time. After their argument, our technician phoned the Ministry of Labour with the stat pay issue, and the Ministry looked into it and determined we are due our pay, and if we don’t have it by Friday, they will conduct a full investigation of the business.

Since then our boss has been conspicuously leaving printouts of the “Ontario Guide to Termination” on his desk and on our lunch table. Morale has taken a nosedive and we are all afraid for our jobs. The prospect of a visit from the Ministry may mean we receive a little pay, and encourage our boss to stop forcing us to stay at work when there is no running water due to frozen pipes, etc., but our boss seems to have gone severely off the rails in the past month or so and it’s quite worrying.

Needless to say, we are all updating our resumes and beginning a tentative work search. It’s depressing that I only started this job in October and the workplace has already become such a cluster. If I do end up needing a new job in a few months, I will be using your guides to cover letters and interviews, and hopefully I won’t be in such a place again!

ask the readers: what should a company jobs page include?

I’m throwing this one out to readers to advise on. Here’s the letter:

We’re developing a careers page on our company website and I’d love your input, as well as the input of your readers. What is good to include? What’s lame?

The primary motivation to develop this webpage is to attract the best applicants when we post positions. There’s nothing glamorous about our industry, and it’s the sort of industry that nobody grows up saying “OMG, my life dream is to work in teapots. I hope I get a teapot job when I get older.” There’s nothing glamorous about our company either. We’re not big on PR or making local headlines or putting ourselves up for Employer of the Year awards.

What we have is a happy, financially stable company with sane management and a moderate amount of perks. We have crazy low voluntary turnover, so we are obviously doing a number of things right. We have many employees in the 5 to 25 years of service range.

I can steal off any number of corporate career “employment at” pages for the template, but I would love to know what potential hires really look for when they view someone’s “employment at” page and how we can make ourselves as attractive as possible.

Readers, what do you say?

I’m being penalized for not participating in monthly athletic events at work

A reader writes:

I work on a team of 15 people in a large office. My direct manager came to our team about a year ago. She is young and very athletic, into running marathons, snowboarding, hiking, etc. She is also very into team-building activities and making our team feel like a family, which is great! My problem comes into play with our team-building activities. She states she cannot make them mandatory, but that I and one other coworker are the only ones who do not participate. I am not against these activities; I used to enjoy them. But with her, every activity has to be extreme and sporty. There was the 10-mile hike, the 5k run, the rock climbing, the parasailing…I’m sure you get the idea.

I have some health problems and cannot do activities like these. I suggested low impact activities like a board game day or a BBQ in the park, and she shot me down without even putting it to a vote with the rest of the team. Those ideas are not exciting enough.

Each month we have one of these activities and I do not show up, she writes on my monthly review that I was not a team player and refused to participate in team-building activities. I have privately conferred with the one other employee who also doesn’t participate, and the same is done to them. She is a good manager otherwise, but I am quite angry to be getting points taken from my performance review because my body can’t hack a 10k hike or run.

Should I speak to her directly and ask her to leave these out of my reviews? Should I take this to HR? I am hesitant to be the office tattletale because I know upper management does not know these things go on and I am sure that at least half of the activities she’s hosted would be prohibited if HR knew. But I don’t want it to seem like I am “threatening” to tell if I continue to get marked down either. I am thankful for any advice you can give!

Ugh, this is such crap. There’s no reason that you should be getting penalized on a performance review for not participating in athletic activities, assuming that your job is not marathon runner, rock climber, or some other title that will give me nightmares tonight.

In any case … Have you told her directly that you would like to participate but cannot because of health restrictions? If you haven’t, it’s time to be more clear with her. As in: “Jane, I would really like to participate in team-building activities (this is you being a good team player), but I have health restrictions that mean I can’t take part in things like running and rock climbing (this is you presenting Highly Sound Reasoning). I’d like to be able to fully participate (look, it’s you emphasizing you’re a team player again), so would it be possible to plan activities that aren’t based on sports?”

It’s hard to argue that you’re not a team player when you’re directly asking for activities that you can participate in.

And you also need to say something like: “I don’t think that my health restrictions should be a factor in my performance reviews. Can those be revisited?”

The mention of health issues should snap her into consciousness. She should already realize that she’s way over the line for penalizing someone for not participating in physical activities unrelated to the core of their job, but the health factor should make her realize that she’s also messing with legal issues. But if she’s not responsive to that, then at that point I really do think you should go talk to someone in HR, because what your manager is doing isn’t okay and it’s worth having someone in a position of authority intervene and point that out to her.

(To be clear, if you weren’t being penalized in your performance assessments for not participating, I wouldn’t advocate going to HR; I’d just advocate being disgusted with her judgment. But you’re being penalized in a way that matters, and that makes it serious business.)

Also: It’s important to note that you shouldn’t need health issues as a reason not to want to participate in this never-ending barrage of athleticism. Health is a reason that no sane person could argue with, so you might as well as raise it — but this constant bombardment of mandatory non-work-related activities in the guise of team-building is poor judgment on its own, and it raises the question of why this manager is relying so heavily on it. As I’ve written here before, what’s fun for some people is often miserable for others, and mandatory bonding alienates many people — the opposite of what it’s allegedly designed to do. And that’s especially true when the activities are physically grueling ones, which not everyone can or does enjoy.

Add in penalizing people who don’t participate, and you have a real clusterfudge of bad judgment.

Read an update to this letter here.

asking a coworker about the real reasons she’s quitting, do I have to reply to recruiters’ emails, and more

It’s five answers to five questions. Here we go…

1. Do I have to reply to recruiters’ emails?

Is it considered rude or inconsiderate not to reply to recruiters’ emails? I’m in the legal profession and I probably get anywhere from 5 – 20 emails a week from recruiters looking to fill positions nationwide. I’m not currently looking to make a move, but I might in the future. Am I burning any bridges by pressing the “delete” key?

No. If you have a relationship with a recruiter already — someone who you’ve worked with in a past job search or who has helped you find candidates when you’re hiring or who you’ve referred to other candidates — then it’s going to be more noticeable, in the “why has my contact suddenly stopped responding to me?” way. But if the emails are from strangers, it’s very unlikely that they’re going to remember you at all, let alone as someone who didn’t answer their emails, if you want to approach them in the future. (Plus, if they did remember you, they’re still not likely to refuse to work with you on principle, if you’re a great fit for a search they’re running.)

Recruiters send out a ton of these emails. They’re used to being ignored (and they’re used to doing plenty of ignoring themselves, when job seekers emails them). It’s pretty normal in that field.

2. Small organization can’t seem to give me details of their health insurance

I’ve been negotiating an offer with a small nonprofit without an HR person. Getting details about their health insurance, beyond the name of the provider and plan, has felt like pulling teeth. They’ve asked me to provide my doctor’s tax ID so they can figure out for me if his fees are covered or reimbursable under their plan. That seems impractical (wouldn’t it be more efficient to send me the details of the plan and let me evaluate it myself?) and inappropriate (I don’t tell my current employer what doctor(s) I visit; why would I tell a would-be employer?). I can’t tell if they’re being opaque to hide poor benefits, if they don’t want to bother putting together a comprehensive explanation of the package to send to me, or if they’re just really inexperienced when it comes to hiring and making this up as they go along. Can I decline this request without shutting down negotiations entirely, or is this a big enough red flag that I might as well seriously consider turning down the job offer?

I don’t think I’d consider turning down the offer over this alone; organizations too small for HR often mishandle this stuff just because they don’t have much experience with it. However, you should definitely take it as a flag to think about whether that type of thing will bother you. If they’re a little weird on other HR stuff, how big of an issue will that be for you? Some people would be mildly annoyed and some people will be completely turned off; it’s really just about knowing where you’ll fall in that spectrum.

But regardless, you can absolutely refuse this request. I’d say something like, “Rather than getting into individual doctors, I’d prefer to simply get more comprehensive information about the insurance plan. Maybe if you provide me with the insurance materials I’d receive as a new employee, I can figure it out from there.”

3. Asking a resigning coworker about the real reasons she’s quitting

A coworker of mine has put in her two weeks’ notice recently, and I am interested in her position. Is it appropriate to ask her, while she’s still working, how much she makes and the exact reasons she’s quitting? She has said she found another opportunity that will allow her to be more flexible, but I noticed she has been very frustrated recently. We have two different supervisors, so I don’t want to try to get a new position if I’m not fully supported, have crazy expectations, etc. Long story short, to ask or not to ask?

It’s absolutely reasonable to talk with her about what her experience in the job has been like and why she’s moving on. I’d be explicit with her that you’re asking because you’re thinking about applying for the role yourself; you’re more likely to get candid information that way.

I wouldn’t ask her directly about what she’s making though; enough people consider salary to be personal information that it’s likely to be considered rude. You could say something like, “Are you comfortable giving me a sense of what the salary range for the role is?” but even there, some people will balk a bit, so you’d want to be sensitive to that.

4. Employee using personal cell phone for work

If I have an employee who is freely using her cell phone for business, if things ever go wrong can she hold us responsible for the bill?

No. If it’s in her name, she’s responsible for it. But keep in mind that if she’s using her personal cell number with business contacts, they may continue to use that number after she leaves your company.

5. What if you don’t remember if you’ve applied with a company before?

I have a question that reveals just how much of an idiot I am, but here goes. When I graduated from college (many, many years ago) I applied for a LOT of jobs, but was not qualified for most of them and was (rightly) rejected. In the intervening years, I’ve built a great resume and am again searching for a job. Here’s my question: I keep coming up against applications that ask if I’ve ever applied at the organization before. There’s no option for “possibly but I can’t remember because it was so long ago.” Is there a benefit/disadvantage to answering to the best of my recollection and hoping I am correct?

If you’re not sure, I’d say no. In fact, if it’s been many, many years, I might say no regardless, unless you were actually interviewed back then. Companies ask this question because if you did apply in the past, they want to check to see if they have any notes on you (notes from interviews, generally). Assuming that you weren’t interviewed or behaved memorably badly in some way, they’re not going to find any notes on you. You’re under no obligation to do any sort of forensic research in your brain to figure out if you sent them an application a couple decades ago; it won’t matter either way to them.

Also, this isn’t idiotic; it’s pretty normal.

when a job description keeps changing during the hiring process

A reader writes:

I am currently interviewing for a job and I think I may get the offer. I just finished up my third and final interview and expect to be notified soon.

However, I am struggling because the position has been described differently by different interviewers and does not seem to match the job description. The job description states that the position is primarily administrative. It was made clear to me, when I met with the executive director, that actually it is a fundraising position, including grantwriting and soliciting major gifts. But in my second and third interview (with a board member and the organization’s founder, respectively) they stated that it was less focused on fundraising, more on administration, with some overlap. When, in my last interview, I asked the founder for clarity, he said he would have to speak to the executive director.

If the job description says one thing, the executive director says another, and other staff say something else – what do I do? I need more clarity before I accept the role (I’d be happy with it either way, as I enjoy and am good at both administration and fundraising, but I want to know what I’m getting into.) How should I ask for this clarification? Should I ask for an updated job description? Or for something written into my contract? I would appreciate any tips!

You’re absolutely right that you need to get this clarified before you accept the role, if it’s offered to you. Too often, people spot conflicting information like this in the interview but don’t resolve it before taking the job, and then end up frustrated when the job turns out to be something different than they thought they were signing up for.

If you’re offered the job, I’d just be direct about this: “I’ve heard differing perspectives on the role from Jane, Bob, and Apollo, and it sounds like they were still ironing out whether the role would be fundraising or administrative. Where does that stand?” And if you’re not already talking to the executive director, I’d ask if you can schedule a phone conversation with her — or with the manager for the role, if that’s a different person — to hash it out (they should understand why you’d want this; if they resist, that’s a red flag).

And yes, I’d ask if you can look at an updated job description as part of that conversation, saying something like, “Since the role has gone through some changes, could I get an updated copy of the job description, to make sure that I’m clear on what you’re envisioning?”

There’s also another piece of this that you shouldn’t neglect: the question of what was behind the differing perspectives in the first place. There could be a perfectly reasonable explanation (such as a simple miscommunication between the executive director and the other two people), but it could be something more worrisome (such as an ongoing battle for control between those parties, or a sharp disagreement about the role that will continue even after you start). If it’s the latter, that’s information that you want to find out about now — not after you start.

Moreover, having that conversation will give you some valuable insight into how the organization operates, aside from the question of this specific job. Are there communication issues? Fuzzy thinking or lack of planning? Confusion over goals and structure? Or was this just a fluke that doesn’t reflect deeper issues? All of that will be helpful information as you evaluate the offer as well.

(And to be clear, if you do conclude that they’re fuzzy thinkers or poor internal communicators, that doesn’t mean you must reject their offer. It’s more about you getting a better understanding of the landscape there so that you can make a better decision for yourself about whether it’s the right fit for you or not. Some people can work just fine in that type of context, and others don’t. So this is about making as informed a decision as possible.)

everything you need to know about snow days at work

With the snow storm that hit much of the eastern part of the U.S. yesterday, you might be wondering whether you get paid when your office is closed, if your employer can require you to work despite the storm, and other questions that arise when weather intersects with work.

Can my employer require me to come into work even if the weather is making it hard for me to get there?

Yes. Your employer can indeed require you to come to work despite severe weather, although a reasonable employer will make allowances for employees who cannot reasonably make it in.

If my company says we should use our own judgment about whether to come in during snow, does it look bad if I stay home?

Reasonable employers don’t expect people to put themselves in harm’s way to get to work during serious storms (assuming that your job isn’t to provide life-saving services). If you judge a weather situation to be seriously dangerous and/or if authorities are telling people to stay inside and off the roads, you should stay inside and off the roads. Those warnings are issued for a reason.

Beyond that, when the situation isn’t bad enough to be a safety issue but you’d prefer not to try to commute in the storm, it will come down to the culture of your workplace, what your manager is like and even factors like how often you’ve missed work recently. If you’re unsure, try asking your manager directly: “Is it really OK to stay home during the storm if we’re concerned about the weather?” Then pay attention to how she answers, not just what she says. You’re listening for the difference between “Yes, of course stay home if you need to!” and “Well, if you really don’t feel safe coming in, I’m not going to ask you to, but it looks like we should be OK, so please try…”

If my employer shuts down the office for a snow day, do they still have to pay me?

It depends on which pay classification you fall into: exempt or nonexempt. These are categories set by the federal government. If you’re nonexempt, your employer must pay you overtime at time and a half your regular pay rate for all hours you work above 40 in any given week, but your employer can also dock your pay when you don’t work at least 40 hours. If you’re exempt, your employer isn’t required to pay you overtime but also cannot dock your pay, except in limited circumstances.

If you’re a nonexempt employee and your office closes because of the weather, your employer is not required to pay you for the days you didn’t work. Some employers will pay you anyway, but the law doesn’t require it; it just depends on your employer’s policy.

If you’re an exempt employee and your office closes because of the weather, you have to be paid your full salary for the week, as long as you worked any portion of that week.

If my employer shuts down for a snow day, can they require that I use a vacation day for the time?

Yes. It might seem unfair, especially if you would have gone into work if your office had been open, but your employer can indeed charge you a vacation day if they close for snow.

If I’m on scheduled leave when my company shut down for snow, do I still have to use up a vacation day for that time, even though my company was closed?

This is up to your employer’s internal policy. Some companies won’t require you to use the vacation time, but others will. If you’re unsure, the best thing to do is to simply ask your manager. Say something like, “I’m uncertain how my planned leave works with the snow day. Should I still count the day we closed as a vacation day?”

my employee is acting like a manager even though I’ve told him to stop

A reader writes:

I have a problem as a manager that I can use some help with. 20+ years of managing others and I’ve never run into something quite like this.

First the background. I work for a small tech startup. We are developing a new product where I needed to create a new team to support it. The initial team is 3 people with me at my location, and another 3-person team at a location in a satellite office in another part of the country. If the product does well, we are going to expand both of these teams to 10 people each by the end of this year. The team at the satellite office was not going to have any management onsite. I do my best with managing remotely, on-site visits, and video conferencing. But even so, I’ve managed remote employees before, so I knew I was going to need to have a team of self starters and leaders to handle the volatility of the first several months of building a new product.

With the leadership needs and team expansion in mind, when I hired the initial staff 6 months ago, I targeted an individual who would be interested in a managerial path. I needed someone who had the technical acumen required for this aggressive project, with the entrepreneurial spirit and ambition to work long hours to make this a success, and someone who is well suited to become a manager when the team size grew. I think I did pretty well at hiring my first 3 remote employees, and one of these peple really embodies all of these characteristics I was looking for. We’ll call him Rich. When I interviewed Rich, we discussed his career goals and my vision for the next 6-18 months for the team and the team’s goals. He was very excited to start at the ground floor, and eventually get the opportunity to be a manager. He was hired on as an individual contributor and a title that clearly indicates that. I would be lost without him. He’s the MVP of the project and has exceeded my expectations. If we hit our target goals for the project and are able to grow the staff, there is nobody else I would rather have manage it.

Which leads to the challenge I’m having. I’ve had several situations where Rich is behaving as the manager. I’m not talking about exhibiting leadership and mentoring the rest of the team – because that’s exactly one of the roles I expected him to play. Unfortunately, he’s gone pretty far down the road as behaving as a manager with hire/fire responsibilities. Everything from having his peers clear their time off with him to assigning them tasks to giving them feedback on how their performance needs to improve if they would like to grow with the company. I’ve had to speak to Rich a couple of times now about overstepping his bounds and that he has to remember that these are peers. He shouldn’t be assigning tasks with deadlines, and he shouldn’t be getting involved with HR type issues such as PTO.

Rich’s peers are very confused by his behavior. One of the members of the team won’t even email me without copying Rich. If I email the team member, he’ll add Rich on the CC line on the response. He has created a situation where he is acting as the de facto boss since I’m physically not there, even though I’m on a video conference call with all of them several times a day. But the second the camera is off, Rich tries to act as “the boss.” I regularly point that out to him that he should engage me immediately if he witnesses things that concern him such as workload, productivity, behavioral issues, or other HR situations. Rich’s response is, “Well, I’m the team lead, so handling this is what I’m supposed to be doing.” My response is, “No, you are an individual contributor, and you were hired as such. I would love to make you a team lead or a full fledged manager. But as previously discussed, we need to hit some target goals as a team and as individuals before we can do this.” I have had this conversation with him at our weekly one on one for the past month. But it isn’t having any effect. He’s using “team lead” in his email signature. Today, I got wind of him addressing an HR violation committed by one of his peers that should have immediately been brought to my attention. I won’t go into details, but it was a clear action that should have resulted in a verbal warning or possible write-up with HR present. When I asked Rich why he didn’t call me right away, his response was once again, “Because I’m the team lead.”

Now I have to do something, and I’m not sure of what. Rich interfering in an incident like this has complicated my ability to address the employee who caused the incident. And as much as I am impressed with Rich’s daily work, he is not a team lead. He also apparently isn’t very good at being a team lead, based on the micromanagement that I’ve witnessed. But I can’t worry about coaching that behavior out of him right now since he isn’t even a team lead! Rich’s title has been made clear to him. His continued insistence that he is in a position of authority and resulting behaviors are undermining my ability to manage my team. It’s apparent that my attempts to remind him of his role have not had any impact, so I will need to be more forceful. I really think I’m at the point where I have to be very blunt. But I’m afraid that if I push back on him too hard, he may just decide that it isn’t worth his time to wait until I am able to give him the title he so desperately wants. If he moves on, my project will fail. I’m not sure how to address this anymore without risking upsetting him. I think he is well intentioned, but the ambition that has made him so good at the job I hired him to do is just overflowing to his ambition to achieve a short term career goal. How do I stop the aggressive behavior towards his peers without stifling the aggressive behavior that has kept our project moving forward?

Oh dear. You’re telling this guy in no uncertain terms “this isn’t your job and I need you to stop doing these things” and he’s continuing to do them anyway, even going so far as using the title you said wasn’t his in his emails?

One of two things is happening here. Either:

1. Rich is unable or unwilling to hear clear, direct communications from you. This is a huge problem if so — huge enough that you need to seriously reconsider your long-term plans for him, because someone who won’t heed clear directives is not someone who you can put in a position of authority.

or

2. You are not being as clear as you think you are, and haven’t been all along. This might seem farfetched, but when you say, for instance, “I really think I’m at the point where I have to be very blunt,” it does raise the question of whether you haven’t been direct and straightforward up until now. Is it possible that Rich is acting like the team lead because you haven’t said explicitly, “You are not the team lead and you cannot act like one, call yourself one, or engage in behaviors X, Y, and Z”?

I don’t know which of these it is … but you can probably figure it out by asking yourself questions like: Have you used words like “you are not the team lead” and “I need you to stop doing X” with him? Or have you been more delicate about it, using language that perhaps felt more diplomatic? When you hear words like “you are not the team lead” and “I need you to stop doing X,” do they feel awkward to you or overly direct? If you feel uncomfortable at the prospect of saying them, chances are good that the words you have been saying have not been explicit enough.

As for what to do now…

If you realize that you haven’t been entirely clear with Rich, you have to do that now. It should sound like this: “Rich, it’s possible that I haven’t been clear enough in the past, but I want to be very clear now so that there’s no room for misunderstanding: You are not the team lead. There is no guarantee that you will become the team lead in the future, although it’s a possibility if things goes well. I need you to stop acting as anything more than a peer to your colleagues. This means that you should not do X, Y, or Z, or anything similar. I’m sorry if I haven’t been clear enough about this previously. To make sure that we’re aligned about this now, can we talk through our mutual understanding of what this means going forward?”

(And if you realize that you’ve been really unclear with Rich, put more emphasis on the”I’m sorry for miscommunicating” side of this. If any reasonable person in Rich’s shoes could have made the mistakes he made, you want to make sure your tone and your words account for that.)

But if you’re confident that you’ve already been explicit enough, then you have a serious problem on your hands. And while I realize that you don’t want to risk losing Rich because you need him for your project, you’ve got to let go of that — because otherwise you’re going to be held hostage to some very, very damaging behavior (and the high likelihood of even worse in the future).

Whenever you find yourself feeling “I cannot lose this employee, regardless of repeated terrible behavior,” that’s a flag to revisit those assumptions. You should never be so dependent on any one employee that losing them could seriously jeopardize your business — because after all, you could lose the person tomorrow for reasons you’d never predict (hit by a bus, won the lottery, family moving, accepts another job, etc.).

Right now, you are being held hostage by at least one thing (fear of losing this guy) and possibly two (fear of being blunt).

announcing a layoff on Facebook, getting to know new coworkers, and more

It’s five answers to five questions. Here we go…

1. How to announce on Facebook that you were laid off

I’ve been an event-marketing consultant for over 10 years, working around my family schedule. Due to life changing events such as a divorce and relocation, I secured full-time employment as an account executive. Of course, I quickly updated my Facebook page and LinkedIn profile, posting pictures and events I had executed. Right before Christmas, the company announced it was closing their Austin office and let the staff go. I had only worked for the company for four months.

I have not updated my Facebook information, nor have I posted my unemployment status due to the company closing its office. My concern is the perception people may have regarding my short-term employment, especially given the fact I have not had full-time employment with a company for many years. What suggestions would you recommend for posting this type of information online? Especially in this day and age when recruiters and hiring managers look you up online and view your postings?

Just be straightforward! When an entire office is closing, people aren’t going to think the problem was you. And by alerting your network, you create the possibility that someone will reach out to you about openings they know of. (Don’t rely an a Facebook post to be your whole networking strategy, of course; you also want to be reaching out to people in your network individually.)

It’s also likely that people aren’t remembering all the details of your work history that are so front-of-mind for you; anyone other than close friends and family probably doesn’t even know or remember that your jobs were part-time before this.

2. How can I get to know people in my new office?

I’m an introverted new attorney who just started working with a small engineering firm. I’m the only attorney, so I work exclusively with management. Is there an easy way of getting to know the rest of my colleagues and office norms so it isn’t as awkward in the cafeteria, etc.? All of my work so far has been with law firms or in academia (i.e. places where there is a 30-page plus manual outlining what to wear, where to go, etc.) so I don’t know how a more informal office functions – and as you might expect, most of my colleagues are middle-aged men, so it’s hard to find commonalities.

Does anyone seem especially open or friendly? Go talk to that person. Make conversation! You can even say you’d love to get to know more people in the office since your job hasn’t put you in contact with any. Then repeat with the next friendliest-appearing person. And if there’s no obvious choice to start with, start with the person whose office is closest to yours. It sounds boringly simple, but that’s the most straightforward way to do it. Most people have had the experience of being new in an office and knowing no one and will be friendly. (And if someone isn’t, assume it’s about them rather than you, and try with someone else.)

In addition to that: If there are any office social events (happy hours, cake for a birthday, etc.), go to them, even if it’s not normally your thing. Also, consider the power of food; you might bring in bagels one morning or some other food-related lure.

Read an update to this letter here.

3. How do I deal with my incompetent American manager?

How do I deal with my American manager? She is a nice person and the same age as me and we get on quite well, but I am resentful about the fact that she is from America doing a basic level admin job in the UK which could be easily filled by a British person.

As we are the only two people in the office, my other work colleagues don’t notice the fact that she doesn’t come into the office until the middle of the morning and spends quite a lot of the day looking at the internet and taking extended lunch breaks and going home early. She also “works from home,” i.e. I have to get to work to deal with the students (I work in a college) and deal with people face to face while she is at home in the warm only answering emails. She also is being paid to be a manager but has shown zero management skills to me (I’m her only employee). Whenever I ask her a question she just refers me to someone else.

Basically she doesn’t do the hours or the work and there is no reason an American worker needs to do the job and take away the job from a British worker.

I think you’re going to be far better off focusing on the fact that she’s a bad manager than what her nationality is. Her nationality doesn’t change the fact that you have a bad manager, and this wouldn’t be any more acceptable if she were British. (Plus, I’m assuming that she’s working there legally, in which case your beef is with your country’s immigration policies, not with a person who is complying with those policies. She herself is not taking a job away from anyone; whether or not your laws are doing that is a different issue.)

In any case, what you have is a bad manager. Here’s some advice on dealing with that (here, here, and here) … and it’s also worth keeping in mind that whoever manages her is the other big issue here — because it’s their job to ensure she’s performing well.

4. Telling an interviewer that I’m now eligible to intern, when I wasn’t before

I applied for an internship. When I went in to interview, I had planned on graduating in May. Later, my interviewer explained that company is looking for a student who will stay in school for a few more semesters so could not consider my application any further.

Recently, I found out that I needed six more classes to earn a second degree. I plan to graduate and then continue taking classes in the summer and fall, thus graduating again in December. I’ve just recently made this decision about going for a second degree, and am unsure whether I should tell my interviewer and try to continue with the internship. Would it make a difference? I suppose she’s made her decision, and I don’t want to be bothersome or make the hiring process more difficult by “putting myself back in the running.” I also don’t want to make it seem as though I’ve decided to stay in school just for this.

It’s fine to email her and let her know that your circumstances have changed; it’s not bothersome to give her that information, as long as you don’t come across as if you believe that the job is now yours as a result. I’d say something like this: “I wanted to let you know that I’ve decided to take additional classes, pushing my graduation date back to December (in order to get a second degree in __). In case that changes my eligibility for the internship, I’d love to still be considered. If you’ve already hired or moved forward with other candidates, I of course understand.”

5. Wording a sign to indicate that drinks are for guests, not employees

My organization’s policy is to provide sodas and coffee pod drinks for guests in the conference room. The room and refrigerator are both unlocked under the honor system. As we are open 24/7 with three work shifts, opportunity has arisen for workers to anonymously help themselves after first shift to the refreshments, leaving shortages for guest events. Locking up the pod coffee maker and installing locks on the refrigerator would be measures that are excessive and not cost effective.

A sign has been requested, but I’m at a loss as to how to phrase the sign. How would you phrase a sign in the conference room that makes it clear that the refreshments are for visitors only without offending current employees? The sign is expected to be left out at all times for all to see.

Actually, current employees aren’t that likely to be offended; it’s your visitors who are likely to be made uncomfortable by it. If the policy is important to enforce (and we had a discussion here recently about why it’s worth reconsidering that), I’d do it by talking with employees directly and explaining the reasons, not by edict-via-sign.

should you refuse to sign a performance improvement plan?

A reader writes:

A peer and I both are HR managers, and we were discussing whether, if we weren’t in HR, we would sign a PIP (performance improvement plan).

I said that if I was the average employee, I would not sign a PIP, because the verbiage (in most PIPs) basically states that you agree with the negative assessment of your performance. The signed PIP can (and will) be used against the employee at unemployment hearings, cause of terminations, EEOC lawsuits, etc. Although most states are at-will and can terminate at any time, I’m against signing a PIP that may cause more damage once the employee is separated from the company.

My peer feels that by the employee not signing the PIP, it may cause more of a difficult work environment, which may cause management to watch the employee more closely and create more of a reason to terminate the employee at the end of the PIP cycle, whereas otherwise the employee might have been able to save their job at the end of the PIP cycle. She also feels that the employee could use this opportunity to search for another job; while agreeing to the terms of the PIP.

What are your thoughts?

If I asked an employee to sign something to acknowledge that they’d received a document (a PIP or anything else) and they refused to sign, that would such a hostile and adversarial move that I can’t imagine the relationship being repaired at that point. How could it not be over at that point?

On the other hand, if I asked an employee to sign something stating that they agreed with a performance assessment, and they didn’t actually agree with that assessment and thus declined to sign, that would be entirely reasonable. No one should push someone to sign something that they don’t actually agree with.

So it’s the difference between signing to indicate agreement with the assessment versus signing to acknowledge receipt. Most PIPs that I’ve seen, if they require a signature at all, ask the employee to sign only to indicate that she’s read the document and understands its terms (which often include that she will be let go if the terms of the PIP aren’t met). If your organization is asking employees to sign that they agree with the assessment — as opposed to agreeing with the plan — that’s problematic, and I’d change that wording.

(And anyone who’s ever asked to sign to indicate they agree with a PIP’s assessment should feel free to add a note saying, “signing to indicate receipt only.”)

And really, the signature requirement itself is a bureaucratic detail; it’s not essential. You can proceed with the PIP without ever asking for a signature.

But yeah, an employee flat-out refusing to sign to acknowledge receipt is a big deal (even courts in California have ruled that it’s misconduct and a disqualifier for receiving unemployment benefits), and a sign that that relationship isn’t going to be salvaged.

5 qualities you really need in your coworkers

When you’re hiring for an open role on your team, you have a list of qualifications that you’re screening candidates against. But in addition to whatever job-specific requirements you’re looking for, there are some other qualities that you want in any new hire, no matter what their position is. Here are five key qualities that you should screen for in building your team.

A determination to get results. You want team members who care about the real impact of their work, rather than appearances. You want people who will persist when they run into roadblocks that might deter the average person, who will scrutinize ideas to make sure that they’ll get the best outcome, and who will hold themselves accountable to getting done whatever they’re there to get done.

Decency. You want people on your team who will treat others as they’d want to be treated themselves – people who won’t be rude, dismissive, arrogant to clients or colleagues. You want people who give others the benefit of the doubt, who respect opinions that differ from their own, who can handle disagreement civilly, and who genuinely care about other people.

A desire for continuous improvement. You want team members whose determination to be successful will lead them to being fairly ruthless when it comes to identifying ways they could perform better. You’ll recognize this trait when you find people who are open about their flaws and fairly obsessive about learning from experience – people who want to incorporate those lessons into practice and be as effective as possible.

Communicative. If you’re ever worked with someone who didn’t speak up about problems or made it difficult for coworkers to approach her to talk about work, you know why this one is important. You want team members who operate with transparency, seek out input from others, and welcome the interaction that makes teams function more smoothly. You don’t want a team member whose instinct is to bury a problem and hope no one will notice – or who will figure, “Well, if they wanted to know that we were way over-budget on this project, they should have asked me.”

A sense of possibility. You want people who are engaged in their work and approach it with a sense of possibility, rather than people whose first instinct is to say “we can’t do that.” (This doesn’t mean that “we can’t do that” is never the right answer; sometimes it is. But you want team members who don’t start from that assumption.)  This will get you a team more likely to embrace rather avoid challenges and to persist in the face of setbacks rather than giving up easily.

I originally published this at Intuit QuickBase.